Dave Smith > wrote in
:

> Michel Boucher wrote:
>
>> I am very much aware of that, and at least one Middle Eastern
>> government has apologized. Many governments were pursuing a
>> diplomatic solution since the publication which obviously Denmark
>> ignored. Perhaps this could have been resolved amicably much
>> earlier and none of this would have come to pass.
>
> There is more than a little irony in all this. I can understand
> that Moslems would be offended by an image of the prophet with a
> bomb, since it would characterize them as being violent. But to
> me, to react to the offensiveness of the portrayal by starting
> riots that have lead to murder and arson??? I have to say that it
> doesn't do much for their argument that it is unfair to portray
> them as being violent.

So, not everyone has the literary talent of Churchill. How, pray
tell, would you suggest they do react, if they want people to listen
to them who are ignoring them? Obviously, once a mob has gone
unruly, there is more violence than the events call for, but that was
also the case with the much more deadly (and much less justifiable)
invasion of Iraq. Putting things in perspective, I believe the
Muslims have very good reasons to be majorly ****ed at the West right
now (and we as a collectivity keep wondering why because it serves
our interests to ignore their suffering), and that the cartoons and
Denmark's unforgiveable lack of interest in resolving this
diplomatically are only the latest straw.

And why are you defending the Danes? They are our enemies too,
leaving bottles of akvavit on Hans Island in violation of Canadian
sovereignty. Of course that's actually funny, but obviously their
close association with the Bush administration in recent years has
caused them to disregard the sensitivities of others in emulation of
the Erstwhile Jet Pilot (copyright Michel Boucher 2006).

--

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why
the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

Dom Helder Camara